Recommendations

The "Response to Protests on UC Campuses," includes 49 recommendations and synthesizes months of inquiry into best practices for handling demonstrations, civil disobedience and free-speech issues related to protests throughout the 10 campuses of the UC system that are strategically divided into three key sections. The three key sections reflect and address recommendations to increase communication between management teams and stakeholders, actual management of incidents by administration members and the campus police, training and, in some cases, the creation of new policies.

The recommendations can be grouped into three sections are: 1) policy, guidelines and procedures; 2) organizational structure; and 3) training and other. The first group of recommendations call for the development, revision, or communication of existing or new policy. The second group of recommendations calls for pre-event planning, organization and communication. The third and last group of recommendations call for specialized training for those responsible for responding to a given incident. The grouping of recommendations can be accessed by selecting the titles above.

Most of the recommendations are within the authority of individual campus leaders and the UC Police. Any changes in systemwide policy will be subject to the standard consultation processes with campus and system administration, students and the Academic Senate.

Recommendation 1. Add to current campus "Free Speech" and police policies language formally recognizing that civil disobedience has had a historic role in our democracy, but that it is not protected speech under the Constitution, and that it may have consequences for those engaging in it.

Recommendation 3. Discuss with the Regents the possibility of increasing opportunities for students and other campus constituencies to address concerns directly with the Regents at times other than during the public comment period at formal meetings.

Recommendation 4. Collect each campus's current time, place, and manner regulations and all policies governing the response to events of civil disobedience, including applicable systemwide and campus police policies; post collected policies on system and campus websites.

Recommendation 5. Create user-friendly summaries of each campus's time, place, and manner regulations and policies governing the response to events of civil disobedience, and distribute the summaries at least annually during student orientations; highlight in the summaries descriptions of conduct that is or could be perceived as threatening to safety and thus might trigger a police response.

Recommendation 6. Increase opportunities for routine interaction between police and students and between the police and key administrators (especially the Police Chief and the Chancellor).

Recommendation 7. Establish a standing event response team on each campus to plan and oversee the campus response to demonstrations-include on the team faculty members and/or administrators recognized by students and faculty to be sensitive to the University's academic mission and values.

Recommendation 8. To the extent necessary, modify police policies to require the participation of senior administrators in decision-making about any police response to civil disobedience—clearly define the respective roles of administrators (objectives) and police (tactics) in this process.

Recommendation 10. When faced with protesters who are non-aggressively linking arms, and when the event response team has determined that a physical response is required, principles should specify that administrators should authorize the police to use hands-on pain compliance techniques rather than higher levels of force (e.g., baton strikes or jabs, pepper spray), unless the situation renders pain compliance unsafe or unreasonable.

Recommendation 11. Place an administrator on-site within viewing distance of the event and with instant communication to the police Incident Commander and to the Chancellor or to the individual to whom the Chancellor has delegated decision-making responsibility.

Recommendation 12. During the course of an event, continuously re-assess objectives, and the wisdom of pursuing them, in light of necessary police tactics—seek to pursue only important goals with the minimum force necessary.

Recommendation 13. Absent exigent circumstances, bar commencement or escalation of force by police unless the Chancellor or the Chancellor's designee approves it immediately before the action is taken. If the Chancellor designates decision-making responsibility, the Chancellor's designee must (Edley) or may (Robinson) be a member of the Academic Senate.

Recommendation 14. Coordinate in advance of planned demonstrations with other police departments likely to provide assistance.

Recommendation 15. Require each campus police agency to seek aid first from other UC campuses before calling on outside law enforcement agencies, except where there is good cause for seeking aid from an outside agency.

Recommendation 16. Obtain input from members of the campus community (e.g., students, faculty, staff) in the process for hiring campus police officers and promoting or hiring officers for command-level positions within the department.

Recommendation 17. Require the Chief of Police on each campus personally to interview and approve all newly hired sworn officers.

Recommendation 21. Establish a regular program for joint trainings, briefings, and scenario planning with law enforcement agencies on which each campus police department is likely to call for assistance or mutual aid.

Recommendation 22. Implement formal training of administrators, at the system and campus levels, in the areas of crowd management, mediation, de-escalation techniques, the Incident Command System, and police force options, to be refreshed annually.

Recommendation 24. Make every reasonable attempt to identify and contact members of the demonstration group—preferably one or more group leaders—in advance of the demonstration to establish lines for communication.

Recommendation 25. Inform protesters, in advance of the event, of the availability of alternative avenues for communication of their concerns or proposals.

Recommendation 26. Pursue a dialogue between Administration officials and the demonstration group about protest objectives and applicable rules for campus protest.

Recommendation 27. Absent special circumstances, assign administrators or faculty members, rather than police, to serve as the primary University representative communicating with protesters during a demonstration.

Recommendation 29. Make every reasonable attempt to establish a communication link with identified leaders or sponsors of the event-for leaderless groups, communicate broadly to the group as a whole (through social media and otherwise) until relationships form.

Recommendation 30. To the extent not already available, establish a communication mechanism for promptly informing the campus community at large about material developments in ongoing protests, for use when appropriate.

Recommendation 31. Establish an internal mediation function at the campus or regional level to assist in resolving issues likely to trigger protests or civil disobedience.

Recommendation 32. Consider deploying this mediation function as an alternative to force, before and during a protest event.

Recommendation 33. Where possible, police should pursue tactics designed to diffuse tensions and avoid tactics likely to increase tensions.

Recommendation 34. Develop or modify existing student discipline processes to ensure that, in appropriate circumstances, they are an available response option.

Recommendation 35. Establish and implement a systemwide response option framework for use on each campus.

Recommendation 36. Require that campus police and other authorities (to the extent controlled by the University) act in accordance with the response option framework, absent exigency or good cause.

Recommendation 37. Develop a systemwide process for determining which "less lethal" weapons may be utilized by UC police officers.

Recommendation 38. Require each campus Police Chief personally to approve the specific types of less lethal weapons available to officers in their department.

Recommendation 39. Require each campus police department to include the list of weapons approved for use in response to demonstrations and civil disobedience in its use-of-force policies, and to make the list available to the public.

Recommendation 40. Recommend that appropriate authorities commission further studies on the effects of pepper spray on resisters as compared to the effects of other force options.

Recommendation 41. Establish at each campus a formal program to allow designated, trained observers to gain access to the protest site for purposes of observing, documenting, and reporting on the event.

Recommendation 42. Establish a program for video recording protest events designed to develop a fair and complete record of event activity solely for evidentiary or training purposes.

Recommendation 44. Coordinate review of after-action reports on a periodic basis with campus event response teams, and with the Office of the President.

Recommendation 45. Establish a structure and process at the system level for discretionary review of campus responses to protest activity, consistent with existing legal limitations.

Recommendation 46. Establish a systemwide Implementation Manager to develop specific policy language in those areas where recommendations call for common or system policies or practices, and to track campus-level measures.

Recommendation 47. Require status reports from each campus six months following the President's acceptance of this Report's recommendations concerning progress on implementation of the recommendations.

Recommendation 48. Require a final report and certification from each Chancellor one year following the President's acceptance of this Report's recommendations confirming that all recommendations so accepted have been implemented.

Recommendation 49. Establish similar reporting and certification requirements for future recommendations arising out of the event review process described above.